Show JUDICIAL NONSENSE IN IDAHO IN THI THE third district court of idaho a case has been decided which is of considerable interest to our people as it involved the right to vote of a number of persons who hu have been members of the church D P F chamberlain was plaintiff and W A woodin defend defendant int ind and the contest was for the office of Shi sheriff of bingham county idaho woodin was elected on the face of the returns and has held the office for about seven months chamberlain claimed the office on the ground that the proceedings and vote at Rex roxburgh burgh on the ath of november 1888 were illegal first because of the action of U 8 marshal baird in appointing deputy marshals to interfere with the election and who arrested citizens for using their right to challenge and second because a number of mormons cormons Mor mons who had nominally withdrawn from the church were permitted to cut cast their ballots and they voted for woodin judge berry decided for the plain UC tw condemned the action of the united states marshal and pronounced the rexburg poll invalid because of the illegal proceedings thereat and also declared that members of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints could not vote in idaho and that these persons were still members of that church notwithstanding their formal withdrawal the office of sheriff therefore gum goes to chamberlain unless woodin concludes to carry the case to a higher court when there may be some chance of justice being done aone As to the action of the united states marshal Max judge berry is probably right in law the united states statutes confer powers on united states marshals in rel relation ailon to elections for members of congress in cities of twenty thousand inhabitants or more Rex roxburgh burgh is not such a city and although the marshal had bad some bor of law for his proceedings under section 2022 united states revised statutes yet au all the powers therein enumerated refer to election in cities of the population named and he therefore exceeded his authority but on the second proposition judge berry seems to have been swayed by prejudice and anti mormon missionary zeal rather than by that sound discretion and strict imparts aliby which should guide the judicial mind it appears from the evidence before the court that the citizens whose votes he has rejected on the ground that they are members of the mormon church had formally withdrawn from membership ajab an in accordance with their written requests the bishops of the wards where they resided had stricken their names from the church records and no longer regarded thew them as members As to the propriety of this step we have nothing now to say that is not the question it is ia the fact with which we have to deal not the morality or wisdom or right or wrong of it these men did actually withdraw from the church for the purpose as they stated under oath of exercising the rights of citizens which had been denied them because of their church membership no other objections to their voting were advanced if the were not members of the mormon church there was no DO ground for their exclusion nor for the vitiation of ther ballots judge berry on theoretical grounds entirely outside of facts decides that these men are still members of the church he goes further and judicially decides that the mormon church is a pure theocracy ya also that it is not a religion moreover that counsel of the priesthood to is equivalent to a command that the word of a priest to an inferior is to him as a thus saith the lord that each of the presiding authorities had ichak an absolute negative on all that the members and inferior bishops claimed to have done and he infers that these men were counseled edil to withdraw that they acted under this alleged command and therefore they are still members within the meaning of ef the test oath let us look at this as calmly as possible under the circumstances how could judge berry if in his senses decide that the mormon church IS is not a religion if it is as he be maintains a pure theocracy he says blits its laws and teachings purport to be direct from the almighty well is that not a religion what is a religion if not a system of faith and worship or an acknowledgment of our obligation to god as our creator with a feeling of reverence and love and consequent duty or obedience to him see Worce worcester or websters dictionary judge berry went completely outside of the case to aim an impotent blow at a religion from frem which he dissents and occupied the place of a bigoted sectarian instead of a united states judge we could demonstrate to him at a proper time that mormonism has all the features essential to a religion that methodism possesses and many more of which the latter is utterly deficient still we recognize methodism as a religion and also mohammedanism and other erroneous systems of faith and worship whether they are theocratic in form or not but to aver that a church is a pure theocracy and yet is not a religion is an inconsistency sis tency and contradiction rather remarkable as a judicial utterance in stating that in the mormon church counsel is equivalent to a command 11 judge berry plainly exhibits his ignorance of the matter in question it is evident he be knows nothing of mormon theology or discipline the very reverse is the truth and there is scarcely a mormon child of average intelligence who does not understand the essential difference between the two terms and their application in the church the statement too that any counsel of a priest to an inferior is to him as a thus saith the lord is still further proof that judge berry knew nothing of what he was talking about for we would not insinuate for a moment that he was willfully misrepresenting and distorting the faith of the mormon people but the judge says further it does not appear that either the presiding bishop in idaho or his superiors peri ors the twelve apostles f or their superior the presidency of three or further still the president the supposed representative of the almighty was or were in any way consulted 11 and yet he be concludes that all this withdrawing movement was done by their counsel and that because of that and in view of the fact that they did not negative the acts of the members in withdrawing and of the bishops in acting on the withdrawal the people who withdrew are still church members this is judicial logic with a vengeance these superiors l were not consulted therefore they are responsible for the movement they did not negative the withdrawal of men from the church 4 therefore those men are still members Is it possible that such amazing contradictions emanated from the bench of the third judicial district of idaho judge berry claims or intimates that he found out what he asserts concerning the mormon system of faith and worship which is not religion and yet is a pure theocracy from its sacred books which he explains are the book of Mor book of covenants and doctrines the pearl of great price and the bible 19 at least he says to determine this we must look at the churches sacred books we are of the opinion that instead of consult ing g these sacred books the judge merely listened to the tirade and denunciation nuncia tion of a certain bulldozing bull dozing doting attorney for the plaintiff whose utter lack of conscience in making attacks upon the mormon church is gen lly recognized if judge berry will read those books carefully without the glasses glasse of ow sectarian prejudice tod mid auti anti cc mormon bias he will 11 find that they teach the very reverse of what ho he has judicially declared to be mormon hormon doctrine and discipline also that his suspicions and the inclusions based upon them are not warranted by anything he can and nd in those books and we would like him to inquire within himself how it would be possible dorany for any mormon bishop president Fesl dent or apostle to prevent a member from withdrawing from the church if he chose to do so also by y what hat process he or they could negative such action if a man baes to leave an organization whether temporarily or permanent lehow chow can his action be prevented judge dge berry delivered himself of a ad wi uhl deal more than what we have quoted on the morn question but we have not y today to refer to it we care cam little ag to the issue of the matter an ab we have no particular in taftt at in the office ot sheriff of engham county but we do not 16 ua to 8 see the faith and position of tw tho church to which we belong 4 presented rePresented by any one and we ite fore protest against the mis mia g and nonsensical utterances 1 01 judge berry in the third dis trot rot court of idaho |